Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Analisa Torres
- 1:23-cv-04365
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Cott allowed discovery from Spectrum to identify the defendant in a copyright case.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may obtain John Doe’s name and address from Spectrum under the subpoena. John Doe receives notice and 60 days to challenge the subpoena or request anonymity; Spectrum must preserve the information and withhold it while a timely challenge is pending.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, Strike 3 asked to subpoena the defendant’s internet service provider before the parties’ required discovery-planning meeting. Strike 3 said it needed the subscriber’s name and address to identify the person associated with an Internet Protocol address involved in alleged movie downloading or distribution.
The court granted the request and allowed Strike 3 to immediately serve Spectrum with a subpoena seeking only the subscriber’s name and current or permanent address. The court also issued protections requiring Spectrum to notify John Doe and giving John Doe 60 days to challenge the subpoena or ask to remain anonymous.
If no challenge is filed, Spectrum may provide the information after the required waiting periods, and Strike 3 may use it only to protect its rights in the lawsuit. Judge Cott also directed the Clerk to close and mark the relevant docket entry as granted.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:23-cv-04365
- Analisa Torres
- June 23, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC brought a copyright-infringement case against John Doe, whose identity was not known to Strike 3. Strike 3 alleged that the Internet Protocol address associated with the defendant was involved in downloading or distributing movies. Strike 3 asked for permission to serve a subpoena on Spectrum, the Internet service provider identified in its motion, before the parties held the conference normally required to begin discovery.
The opinion says the court had granted the same type of application in five prior related proceedings and incorporated its earlier analysis rather than repeat it. The court also noted a substantial risk of mistaken identification and therefore decided to issue a protective order with the subpoena.
Ruling
The court granted Strike 3’s application. It authorized Strike 3 to immediately serve Spectrum with a subpoena seeking the name and current and/or permanent address of the John Doe subscriber associated with the Internet Protocol address stated in the order. The subpoena could not seek additional information, including an email address or telephone number, and had to include the court’s order and a notice to John Doe.
Spectrum must serve John Doe with the subpoena, the order, and the notice within 60 days after receiving the subpoena. John Doe then has 60 days from service of the subpoena to file a motion challenging it, including a request to cancel or change it, or to request permission to litigate anonymously. John Doe must notify Spectrum if a challenge is filed, and Spectrum may not release identifying information before the 60-day period ends or before the court rules on a timely motion, whichever is later.
If neither John Doe nor Spectrum contests the subpoena within 60 days, Spectrum has 10 days to provide the responsive information to Strike 3. Any information disclosed may be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights as stated in its complaint. Judge James L. Cott directed the Clerk to close Docket Number 9 and mark it as granted. The order does not decide whether copyright infringement occurred.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.